Go a step further! Use Knowledge: Security Procedures work as a background skill for both hiding and detecting, and make your stealthy people stealthier and your guardy people guardier!

Aha, except Knowledge skills do jack squat in SR4 unless the GM is cheating.

How is the GM cheating if he house rules that anyone can get bonus dice for infiltrating and noticing infiltrators from specific knowledge skills??

That's what I said. In SR4, Knowledge skills do not give bonus dice.

That's not cheating. That's an adjudication of how a knowledge skill has an in-game effect. That's what GMs are supposed to do with Knowledge skills - reveal facts, give bonus dice, provide plot hooks. If the GM doesn't do that, knowledge skills actually do *nothing at all*, because there are no rules attached to them other than general suggestions.

Access info, yes. Bonus dice, no. Anyway, it's not like the GM can't do whatever they want to the rules.

Find me where it says in the book I can *only* provide information with knowledge skills, then.

Granted I can't find a place in 4th where it says I can, because I don't have my book at work... But you sure as hell could in SR3, with the form of Background skills. So there's precedent, certainly.

Right, it *is* a major difference from SR3 to SR4. That's my point. That's not precedent, that's edition change.

At this point I think you're just being contrary for the sake of it. Fine, sure, it doesn't explicitly state that's the way they're used. I like that use. Ergo, my suggestion.

In the future, just don't call that "cheating." It's a loaded word, implies it's unfair, and is semantically combative.

I do think it's a huge, negative alteration of existing rules, so I'll go with what fits. I certainly don't subscribe to the 'it doesn't say *not* to' school of logic.

I don't see how 'primarily legwork and character development' and 'occasionally provide information' translates into 'SR3-style bonus dice', so I don't think I'm being contrary for no reason.

When you call somethink that very much looks like a house rule succestion "GM cheating", you pretty much are.

That's not the contrary part, though. The contrary (for great reason) part is where I say that SR4, in a dramatic change from SR3, doesn't have bonus dice from Kno skills.

I'm just going to point out that the inferred intent of the character is NOT what determines what skill to use. The player describes their actions, the GM determines the most appropriate skill to use in a given situation. This is something that usually doesn't come up as many people don't role play even so far as to describe how they do something, just what skill they use, but other reasons too like time and the fact that most times it doesn't matter since it's the same.

I can have my character INTEND to steer a vehicle by shooting the driving wheel, that doesn't mean it can work if I have a high enough driving skill, because that wasn't driving. The GM gets final say on determining the skill used for an action, regardless of intent.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to use the skill when reasonable, but when it's not reasonable the GM is well within their bounds to say so.


Also, Infiltration and Astral/Magic threads:
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...=31534&st=0
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=29651

I am saying that the actual trappings of the intended action do not affect the skill used for that action.

You can intend to steer a vehicle by shooting the steering wheel, you might not be able to pull it off, but if you have a high driving skill, you might.

If the player does not know what action he should be taking to pull off something his character knows how to do, then going by what you have said, the character can't pull it off because he cannot describe his character's actions.

No. There is no amount of driving skill that will allow you to drive (or make a Pilot test) by shooting the steering wheel. Or Firearms skill, for that matter.

I disagree. If you simply wish the vehicle to turn in any direction other than its present course and you do not really care how much it turns by or anything like that, how much would it matter if you kick the steering wheel, shoot it or bump it with your ass?

First, that's not 'driving'. He said, 'steer' the vehicle, not 'make a random course change of any description'.
Second, it won't work. Even wild swerving is a sustained movement on the wheel, not a bump.
Third, even if a kick or ass-bump would work, a bullet wouldn't.
Fourth, you should be using wireless or skinlink anyway.

I'll admit that you're right within the bounds of your example: you *can* shoot a car to alter its course. It's not driving, and it's not a Piloting test, but your Firearms test could have the end result of 'change course'. Personally, I'd aim for the tires.

A single bullet might not produce a sustained movement on the wheel. But a steady stream might.

It also might shred the steering wheel to pieces. Most aren't made of bullet proofed materials you know, typically plastics, woods, and rubbers, some metals but usually lightweight and not the kind that can stand up to that sort of impact.

You are fighting a loosing Battle here... Toturi has his own ideas, and they usually do not imitate real life in any way, shape or form... One of the biggest reasons that the previous topics on this subject went nowhere.

Action must follow intent...

If your intent is to Drive, then you must actually Drive, not shoot the steering wheel for some random bit of craziness...
By the same token, if you want to Infiltrate, your actions must reflect this... Running around in bright orange and waving your arms around like a lunatic will not allow you to infiltrate successfully, regardless of what Toturi believes.

That is just common sense...

If a character's actions do not reflect his intent, well, he should expect to fail outright. What more really need be said?

Indeed it must. But the trappings of that action need not follow what is commonly assumed. Thus the character's action always reflect his intent, if he intends to infiltrate, then he does so; even if he chooses (or is forced) to run around in bright orange and wave his arms around like a lunatic while doing so.

The character's intent does not create reality, though. Actions do. If a character were mind-controlled into believing that a stick was a gun, would you allow the player to roll Pistols? Because the character really, REALLY thinks that he's holding a pistol, right? Or are you maybe advocating laughing, and saying "sure, roll Pistols", and totally ignoring whatever is rolled? That I could see, for fun

The character's actions and the player's intent should match up for a specific skill, I think. A player wishes to infiltrate, but their character is running around painted orange. That's not infiltration.

OF COURSE everything can be slightly tweaked to be situational. Running around whilest bright orange, with everyone around them also doing the same thing...

While I agree with the first part, I disagree with the second. The trappings of the action matters only insofar as the modifiers applied to the action, the trappings of the action should not affect whether the action can be taken in the first place.

If the intent of painting a car red is to make it go fasta, does it go fasta if the character succeeds at an automotive mechanic check to paint the car?

If the intent of using the automotive mechanic skill is to make it go fasta, with painting it red as part of the action taken, then it should go fasta if the skill check succeeds.

So you don't actually requier the PC to have the nessecary mod part and tools to mod his car to go faster?
just intend for it to go faster is needed and maybe can of red paint

The red wunz go fasta and my wun is blue. Gunna paint it red so it goez fasta.

I think I half-agree with this I think the action can be taken so far away from the intent as to make the action not match the intent whatsoever. Thus in my example above with the stick-gun, or the red-painted-car example too. The actions have to SOMEWHAT match intent, in these cases they don't seem to.

I'm trying to come up with an extreme-r example. Can you infiltrate a research facility while sitting in a lazy-boy chair in your apartment, drinking a beer? Even if you really intend to infiltrate?

If you're very careful.

Well the guards of the said facility are at least very unlikely to see you

Hoo boy, this is getting silly.

I still think character skill/knowledge should trump player skill/knowledge, so then intent should matter in terms of the meta gaming sense, as it is the player who determines intent but if they are the sole proprietor of action, then why even record the skill/knowledge of the character seeing as it will have no bearing on these extreme examples.

Ok, lets say we run with the Orc thinking red vehicles are faster. Now, is the intent the player is deciding for their character consistent with their character? If they have no mechanical skill/knowledge of the vehicle in question, sure, then it just becomes another example of some stupid metahuman stereotyping but lets say that Orc is not defaulting and gets a reasonable chance to the legwork, acquisition, and installation of "red parts" ( abstracted because I don't have the required mechanical knowledge of current vehicles and the colour of their parts, let alone future ones ) - shouldn't the result be that the vehicle in question actually does go faster thanks to the "red parts". But if that same skilled/knowledgeable Orc has a relatively dumb player ( maybe they aren't "dumb" per se, just doing it for the Lulz ) who selects the "only red paint" action, then WtF doesn't the GM say "Hey, that doesn't seem to be consistent with your character being stated out as a mechanical [hobbyist/professional/genius], are you sure that would be their action with the intent of having a higher top speed of the vehicle?" or are we just going to have a laugh at the dumb Orc character who is actually smart in this area having a "orc" moment.

Law of Chromatic Superiority
Clap Your Hands if You Believe

In my games, I don't use infiltration for social infiltration, like fitting into a crowd. I request the character use Ettiquette, to make the people observing feel as though the character belongs there, opposed by Ettiquette+ Intuition. But, this is a house rule, and may not work for everyone.

If the rules actually require those items, then the PC needs to have those.

If your character succeeds on his check and has the prerequisites per the rules.

Which is why this conversation never goes anywhere. Trapping MAtter immensely. If you are forced into a situation where it becomes impossible to perform your desired intent because of your trappings, then you automatically fail with no roll... Pretty Simple...

If you wish to still do so, you can always take a long shot roll with a hefty Threshold... or you can Burn Edge if you like... But the standard roll should not be allowed in such situations.